Laser Safety

I have always taken the streets of Boulder for granted. We have been lucky enough to have designated biking lanes for all our cyclists. I never really thought of what life would be like without these lanes until recently. I just got back from a trip to Chicago, another biking enthusiast city, and a rather creative invention was brought to my attention; Laser Light Lanes. I found this innovative idea on the top floor of the Chicago Art Institute, and apparently quite a few cities are catching on. The idea was first thought of in Massachusetts. The basic concept is to promote cycling safety at night in locations without designated bike lanes.
The inventor had witnessed one too many of his friends clipped by traffic, and decided to take action. He came up with a device that attaches to the back of virtually any bike seat. This device uses a laser pointing mechanism to paint a wide enough lane for bikers to safely cruse along the streets with traffic. The laser lane is also narrow enough for cars to pass by with ease. I can only imagine seeing a group of cyclists ride by with neon colors trailing close behind. At first glance it might seem a little ridiculous, but the idea actually makes a lot of sense. It would allow for anyone to ride at night on the streets of virtually any city without worrying about cars drifting into your vicinity. There are plenty of cities around the U.S. that aren't as favorable to bikers as Boulder is, and these Laser Lanes would allow biking enthusiasts around the country to enjoy their own personal lanes. Could this be the future of biking?
Investors of this product are excited to put it on the open market. They understand how expensive it can be for some cities to construct miles and miles bike lanes on pavement, and how dangerous it can be to ride on streets without them. Once it is made available the designers want it to be functional and affordable for everyone with a bike. The gadget would primarily be used for night riding, but it would be extremely useful for cities that don't experience much daylight throughout the year. Its beams are also bright enough for every passing car to see and understand that a cycler occupying that portion of the road.
We should consider ourselves fortunate to have lanes and trails all throughout Boulder. However; these Laser Lanes could prove beneficial in the near future for riders who need to traverse those dark dangerous roads.
Until next time, keep those wheels turning!
Nick Wachs

Good Intentions

Sometimes even the best of intentions can go amiss, and it is true, sometimes too many chefs really do spoil the soup. At the risk of sounding like an ungrateful, never satisfied, and always upset bicycle snob, I have to write about some good intentions out on the road that generally go wrong, and that need to be fixed.

The cyclist's usual and greatest frustrations when it comes to dealing with automobiles are obviously those situations when the cyclist is nearly smashed and run over. These scenarios include cars making crazy left hand turns, drivers who are texting and unknowingly driving in the bike lane, and the infamous and terrifying blind right hand turn. While these are the typical cyclist gripes (and with good reason), there is another automobile action that is just as annoying, uncomfortable, and potentially as dangerous.

The situation I'm talking about is when drivers, attempting to be conscious of and helpful to the approaching cyclist, just stop in the middle of the road to let the cyclist complete his or her left hand turn. While I fully believe this is done with the best of intentions, and the hopes of somehow protecting the cyclist or of providing the cyclist with a high priority on the road, it is one of the most awkward and potentially dangerous situations for a cyclist to be placed into.

First of all, it's extremely uncomfortable because the cyclist, waiting for a gap in traffic in which to make the turn is suddenly and unknowingly thrown into the position of literally holding up traffic, as everyone must now wait behind this hyper-sensitive, awkward, stopped driver. Beyond this, however, it can be very dangerous if the cyclist is trying to turn across two lanes of traffic. With that one car stopped in the middle of the road, the cyclist feels pressure to hurry and make the turn then and there, but often, the cars coming in the other lane, or those stuck behind the suddenly stopping driver, speed past them. If the cyclist is pressured into making a turn at the same time that other cars are speeding around the traffic jam in the other lane, this could lead to a potentially bad collision. Finally, it's never a good idea for cars to just stop in the middle of traffic -- when drivers do this, they are putting themselves at risk of being rear-ended and causing a pileup. In short, when automobilists try to help bikers by suddenly stopping in the middle of traffic, they actually put everyone at risk: cyclists must uncomfortably make turns, cyclists risk being struck by traffic in other lanes, and the cars themselves risk an accident.

Throughout my daily commutes, I make several left hand turns, waiting for holes in the traffic to cut across the road, into the turn lane, and finally making the turn. In doing this, I've experienced the above scenario quite often lately, and while I'm sure the car drivers are doing this with nothing but the best and nicest of intentions, things work better and safer all around if we all just stick to the agreement: bikes are treated as real vehicles on the roads with rights and responsibilities, riding in the designated bike lanes, using hand signals to turn and enter traffic, etc. If everyone involved acts in accordance with this, the roads will be safer and more efficient -- automobilists can get to wherever they need to and so can the cyclists.

Necessity or Culture?

The debate over bicyclist behaviors/responsibilities/philosophies while out on the road continues (see Unofficial Guide's latest post on this topic). While there are clearly pros, cons, and good points made by both sides of this debate, I wonder how much of this debate is driven, not so much by actual cycling experience and needs, but by local cultural pressures.

In my own experience, I have only ever been scolded for not following all car traffic laws in smaller communities like Boulder. Here, the general atmosphere regarding cycling is definitely one in which cyclists are entitled to rights only through strict obedience to all traffic laws. This general attitude leads to a hyper-awareness and sensitivity to how well a cyclist does or does not obey these regulations, thus creating a scenario in which car drivers and even other cyclists feel that scolding a cyclist for running a red light or rolling through a stop sign is appropriate.

What is interesting is that this attitude and general atmosphere seems to really exist only in smaller communities, while in larger cities, people just travel without really stressing the ways other people are traveling. Pedaling in Denver is an entirely different story than pedaling in Boulder – as long as you don't crash into anybody or anything, people seem content to let cyclists ride, and no one scolds a biker for running through a red light. This trend holds even more true when we look at larger cities. Recently, I was in Chicago, and every traveler, whether pedestrian, taxi cab, automobilist, or cyclist, just did whatever was the quickest and most efficient, and as long as nobody did anything stupid or dangerous, there were no problems. Obviously, conflicts still arise and accidents still occur, especially when one group of travelers (in particular, car drivers) are inattentive, but as long as all parties are smart about what they're doing, nobody seemed to care enough about the principle of bike laws enough to scold and argue with a cyclist over an impractical and inefficient law, such as waiting at an empty red light for it to turn green.

In comparing these two cycling settings, what must be called into question is why there are such differing attitudes, and actions; why in some places, cyclists are scolded for not following all traffic rules even if they are still being safe and practical, and other places they are not. While proponents of the approach that requires all cyclists to follow all car traffic laws would maintain that it is necessary for safe, efficient, and cooperative traveling and road usage, the experiences of cyclists in large cities seem to prove this to be inaccurate. If it is possible for cyclists to travel in a safe and practical way while not necessarily being compelled to follow each and every road regulation (especially when they require impractical or inefficient actions on the part of cyclists), then perhaps they should be allowed to do so, and in the end, perhaps the trend of pressuring or scolding cyclists is one driven more by specific cultural attitudes rather than actual cycling needs or safety.

I win, you live.

I lose, die, and you still live.

Forget street laws, and all you whiney drivers who can't tolerate having to brake every once in a while.

I've found that I'm still alive to this day, while all around me are ghost bikes and friends missing teeth. I believe that I am alive because I follow a different street law, and I'm sticking with it.

First, I must repeat a classic argument against following "to-the-letter" traffic law: when an automobile is in an accident, more often than not we're talking about bent metal. When a bicyclist is in an accident, we're talking about "bent" bones.



My traffic law follows the same philosophy as ski resorts, where hundreds of people are randomly careening downhill without traffic safety devices and very limited disturbance. The rule is defiantly simple: "people ahead of you have the right of way. It is your responsibility to avoid them.".

Notes to self:
1. Get in front of a car, don't try to wobble along between parked cars and the moving traffic. I'll get doored or right-hooked.
2. Get in front at intersections, and when possible, clear the intersection so that I've got free roam on the road ahead. Ahhhh, the peace.
3. Be conspicuous; bright colors, flashing lights, track stands. Rather be a spectacle than a speckle.
4. Get in a verbal fight. Shout at cars. Maybe don't go through with the vivid slow-motion imagination of my super-self jumping off my bike at full speed while swinging my lock to a devastating thud on their windshield, dragging that lazy honker through their window and... just keep riding. I'm better than them.
5. Bike right! Bike right!
6. Wave to other cyclists, but not too quickly; remember that we're all out there with our lives on the line. Not the best setting for pleasantries.

Angry about Traffic Laws? Or just your lack of common sense?

This article is based on a letter to the editor published on November 11. See the letter here:

http://www.dailycamera.com/ci_13756578

Are you really claiming to be ignorant that a stop sign means STOP?

I know which stop sign you speak of. It’s the one with the police officer handing out tickets to the huddle of skateboarders and cyclists a few yards away. It’s also the only stop sign in that direction for that obscenely dangerous turnaround right after Folsom on Colorado avenue. The one that I watch students nearly every day come seconds away from mashing someone on a bike because the drivers in the turnaround don’t have a stop sign. Thankfully, most of the cyclists do, which is one of the only things preventing against the cyclist shmear.

I’m not sure why anyone biking on the road surrounded by thousands of pounds of steel just a foot or even inches away wouldn’t find themselves capable of following one of the most basic rules of the road: stop at stop signs. It’s Colorado law to follow traffic codes if cycling on the road. Even if someone is claiming to be unfamiliar, or “ignorant” of traffic laws, the cop standing a few feet away surrounded by irritated cyclists should probably be a dead giveaway that now is the time to follow EVERY law…not just the traffic-related ones.

As far as a safety class…guess what? Those are expensive, too. In a capitalistic society we’re going to be punished through monetary loss. Besides, do I really want to be forced to take a completely useless basic traffic law course just for cruising through a stop sign? Not really…especially when it’s probably going to cost as much as the ticket. I’d rather pay and be done, and skip the training-wheel class. If you can’t figure out basic traffic laws while cycling, you’re giving us all a bad name... so get back on the sidewalk.